arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2108.07474cs.SE
收藏

社区包维护说明的基础理论-注册报告

A grounded theory of Community Package Maintenance Organizations-Registered Report

Théo Zimmermann, Jean-Rémy Falleri

摘要:

(a)背景:在许多程序设计语言生态系统中,开发人员越来越依赖于通过包管理器提供的外部开源依赖项。关键的生态系统包如果得不到维护,就会给依赖它们的项目和整个生态系统带来健康风险。因此,社区可以采取主动行动,通过采用需要维护的软件包来缓解问题。b)目的:我们研究的目标是探索这样的社区倡议,我们将从现在起指定为社区包维护组织(CPMO),并建立一个理论,它们如何以及为什么出现,它们如何运作以及它们对周围生态系统的影响。c)方法:为了实现这一目标,我们计划使用一种称为扎根理论的定性方法。我们已经开始采用这种方法,依靠来自几个CPMO的“现存”文件。我们提出了我们的初步结果和研究问题已经出现。我们计划通过收集适当的数据(理论抽样)来回答这些问题,特别是通过联系CPMO参与者并通过电子邮件,问卷调查或半结构化访谈来询问他们。d)影响:我们的理论应该为愿意在自己的生态系统中启动CPMO的开发人员提供信息,并帮助当前的CPMO参与者更好地了解实践的状态以及他们可以做得更好的地方。

英文摘要:

a) Context: In many programming language ecosystems, developers rely more and more on external open source dependencies, made available through package managers. Key ecosystem packages that go unmaintained create a health risk for the projects that depend on them and for the ecosystem as a whole. Therefore, community initiatives can emerge to alleviate the problem by adopting packages in need of maintenance. b) Objective: The goal of our study is to explore such community initiatives, that we will designate from now on as Community Package Maintenance Organizations (CPMOs) and to build a theory of how and why they emerge, how they function and their impact on the surrounding ecosystems. c) Method: To achieve this, we plan on using a qualitative methodology called Grounded Theory. We have begun applying this methodology, by relying on "extant" documents originating from several CPMOs. We present our preliminary results and the research questions that have emerged. We plan to answer these questions by collecting appropriate data (theoretical sampling), in particular by contacting CPMO participants and questioning them by e-mails, questionnaires or semi-structured interviews. d) Impact: Our theory should inform developers willing to launch a CPMO in their own ecosystem and help current CPMO participants to better understand the state of the practice and what they could do better.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑